i sent it up the chain of the campaign and they didn t think anything of it either. by the way, these comments were not made at the podium that have created a little bit of the stir. they were in a side bar conversation with reporters. to say that the governor perry is responsible for what was said, that s not realistic. he was not responsible and he has said, you know, that he doesn t support the comments that were made. why not already patrick jeffress is admitted that the wordphu was probably not a fair word. but it does seem that there wasn t a denuns yags you would expect faster and quicker from folks if the evangelical community. this is from the political realm to the church realm. i ve been very clear as i addressed this. i m not going to go over the fact there is a significant thee logical differences between
tony before i get to the larger question about where social c conservatives are, i want you to get you to respond to something romney said. here was governor romney about patrick jeffress and rick perry. he then used religion as a basis for which he said he would endorse governor perry and reason to not support me. and governor perry then said that introduction just hit it out of the park. i don t believe that that kind of device based upon religion has a place in this country. i want to ask you about the first place. governor perry selected that individual, is that true? it s not true, chuck. pastor was recommends by supporters in texas. we i know the pastor.
convincing others of the facts. but once you get to those facts, you envisage a rather dramatic development, that is another government, essentially engaged in a kind of act of violence, if not war against saudi arabia on american soil, with americans potentially dying. so this is a about as serious thing as one could imagine if it took place as it happened here since 9/11. and so the president is going through the facts very carefully. he s threatening further sanctions on iran. and i think what is unspoken, which is probably where the irritation at mitt romney s spokesman, the questioner in the journalistic pool, is what does this mean for our policy towards iran? if this country got nuclear weapons and they are prepared to do this kind of thing, kill the saudi ambassador, what are we going to do about it? and we re not any closer today than we were during the bush administration or the last three years to solving that difficult dilemma. it seems that based on the reporti
but once you get to those facts, you envisage a rather dramatic development, that is another government, essentially engaged in a kind of act of violence, if not war against saudi arabia on american soil, with americans potentially dying. so this is a about as serious thing as one could imagine if it took place as it happened here since 9/11. and so the president is going through the facts very carefully. he s threatening further sanctions on iran. and i think what is unspoken, which is probably where the irritation at mitt romney s spokesman, the questioner in the journalistic pool, is what does this mean for our policy towards iran? if this country got nuclear weapons and they are prepared to do this kind of thing, kill the saudi ambassador, what are we going to do about it? and we re not any closer today than we were during the bush administration or the last three years to solving that difficult dilemma. it seems that based on the reporting that we ve seen this morning